Education and Outreach Strategies

Needs and Challenges

This plan identified the goals detailed below. TPWD programs and collaborative efforts with conservation partners address these goals but much work is still needed to provide effective conservation education that demonstrates real benefits to the natural resources of Texas.

• 
  Goal #1. Provide conservation education and interpretive opportunities that are consistent with the Department’s mission and that enhance the state’s economic vitality, sustain its natural resources, connect Texans to the outdoors and increase individual and community well-being.
  

• 
  Goal #2. Increase public awareness and understanding of the benefits of conservation, especially the importance of active management of Texas’ private and public lands, water, wildlife and historical resources.
  

• 
  Goal #3. TPWD and its partners need to target new and diverse audiences to involve more people in TPWD’s mission, especially those from urban areas.
  

• 
  Goal #4. Promote public awareness and responsible participation in outdoor recreation, especially hunting, fishing and nature tourism, and to foster an appreciation of natural, cultural and historical resources.
  

• 
  Goal #5. Encourage cost-effective partnerships with other state agencies, universities, local, state and national conservation organizations, private landowners and citizens to coordinate and leverage outreach, education and interpretation efforts.
  

• 
  Goal #6. Regularly evaluate outreach, education and interpretation programs.
  

Nature Tourism Issues and Strategies

Nature-based tourism is defined as responsible travel to natural areas, which conserves the environment and improves the welfare of local people. It is tourism based on the natural attractions of an area. Examples include hunting, fishing, birdwatching, photography and visiting parks. These experiential tourists are interested in a diversity of natural and cultural resources. They want what is real, and they want to be immersed in a rich natural, cultural, or historical experience.

Through partnerships with other state agencies and local organizations, TPWD has been able to do more for landowners and communities. TPWD is an active member of the Texas Nature Tourism Council (TNTC), part of the Texas Travel Industry Association. As part of the TNTC, TPWD is able to meet regularly with nature tourism counterparts in Texas Department of Agriculture, Texas Cooperative Extension, Texas Historical Commission, universities, communities, landowners and others interested in nature tourism. The Council makes it possible for agencies to coordinate workshops and outreach efforts to prevent duplication of work. These partnerships are important to the continued success of nature tourism workshops and educating communities and landowners on incorporating nature tourism into their business plans.

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department is actively involved in nature tourism development on both the community level and the private landowner level through the work of the nature tourism coordinator. The nature tourism coordinator currently works one-on-one with landowners in a variety of ways. When possible, the coordinator meets with landowners when they initially have their site assessment done by private lands biologists from Texas Parks and Wildlife. The nature tourism coordinator supplements the biological site assessment with guidance on potential nature tourism ventures that could work on the property as the landowner implements suggested habitat management techniques.

In addition to working with landowners and community leaders, the nature tourism coordinator also oversees development and maintenance of the Great Texas Wildlife Viewing Trails, a driving trail system that guides nature tourists to the best wildlife viewing sites the state has to offer. In developing these trails, the nature tourism coordinator works directly with many landowners, site managers, public land managers and community leaders educating them about the benefits of nature tourism destinations, how to reach their market and possible site enhancements to make their site more readily accessible to wildlife viewers.

The Nature Tourism Coordinator oversees the partnership between TPWD and the Gulf Coast Bird Observatory (GCBO) to run the Great Texas Birdwatching Tournament. This tournament is a self-funded event co-sponsored by TPWD and GCBO that raises money for habitat conservation, restoration, acquisition and monitoring projects along a 41-county area of the Texas Coast. Restoring existing habitat and acquiring new habitat is essential to ensuring stopover habitat for neotropical migratory birds as well as providing year-round habitat for resident animals.

Continue to work cooperatively with other organizations doing nature tourism work with landowners and communities. This allows cooperation in the use of resources where necessary and ensures the best technical guidance possible to landowners and communities both one-on-one and in workshop settings.

Develop a nature tourism certification program for public and private landowners and nature tourist destinations. A certification program would give incentives to tourism destinations to conserve and restore native habitat in Texas. Additionally, tourists visiting Texas would be able to research tourism destinations based on requirements met or exceeded by certified locations.

Develop workshops as needed in areas of the state that have landowners and communities interested in nature tourism. These workshops should follow proven formats, contain the top subjects from previous workshops, and should be marketed widely through all of TPWD’s partners so as to reach the widest audiences possible.

Fund habitat acquisition or restoration through the Great Texas Birding Classic benefit migratory birds and populations of other native species. If additional funding is available, TPWD would be able to contribute to the habitat projects funded through our partnership with the Gulf Coast Bird Observatory.

Urban Wildlife Management Issues and Strategies

Introduction

The rapid urbanization of Texas creates many wildlife challenges and opportunities. Where humans and wildlife meet, there is potential for conflict, but also opportunity for sustaining compatible terrestrial and aquatic wildlife populations and increasing people's awareness of and appreciation for wildlife.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Texas is expected to be the second most populous state in the nation by 2025. Some counties are growing faster than others, but regardless, effective planning and concentrated development should be encouraged across Texas to combat suburban sprawl and loss of wildlife habitat. Open spaces within the urban/suburban environment are crucial for populations of development-sensitive wildlife species. Open spaces are areas that are free of development pressures and may include fields, forests, and riparian corridors. Open spaces serve many purposes, such as filtering pollutants from the air and water, conserving water and soil, supplying habitat for pollinators and the plants that require them for reproduction and furnishing adequate space and habitat for breeding, foraging, travel and cover for wildlife.

Even though urban and suburban areas often contain more generalist wildlife species and offer limited opportunities for land protection and management, wildlife conservation programs should not ignore these lands. Indeed, rapid development and urban/suburban sprawl spreading out and away from urban centers are resulting in significant impacts on natural resources across Texas. For these reasons, it is becoming increasingly important that natural resource management agencies proactively work with local governments in urban and urbanizing areas (especially those with a high percentage of annual population growth expected) to ensure protection of the public's fish and wildlife resources and to minimize primary and secondary impacts from development.

As urban populations often seem “disconnected” from nature, these people may not always perceive that wildlife or habitat loss are critical threats that could impact them directly. However, the same environmental degradation that threatens wildlife populations can degrade drinking water supply, air quality or other factors of immediate interest to city dwellers. Drawing those connections for urbanites may create a new constituency for wildlife and habitat protection based on enlightened self interest. Children especially benefit from the exploration of their natural world as it increases their knowledge of environmental issues, appreciation of nature, and their potential willingness to participate in conservation actions as adults.

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department’s Urban Wildlife Program strives to maximize biodiversity within urban areas, build critical public support for conservation efforts, and assist in guiding development pressures to help ensure the conservation of species and habitats in presently rural areas. By conserving and helping to manage remnant tracts of wildlife habitat close to urban centers, the Urban Biologists help provide convenient outdoor recreation and education opportunities and begin to address the alienation from nature experienced by many urban residents. Furthermore, some of the development pressure on the rural fringes of urban centers is from people who wish to "get back to nature" and want to live in an area where outdoor recreation and wildlife viewing opportunities are easily accessible. Providing more natural public lands within or near urban areas will help to make cities more livable and may reduce the pressure to develop rural farms and woodlands.

It is encouraging to note that there is increasing cooperation between state agencies and local governments in Texas to encourage municipalities, citizens, and developers to become better stewards of our natural resources. For example, Texas Parks and Wildlife’s Urban Wildlife Program in Dallas/Ft. Worth is a member of an interagency “Stream Team.” The “Stream Team” is made up of stream experts, bioengineers, city planners, ecologists, etc. from Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and representatives of private consulting firms. The Stream Team assists local municipalities in addressing stream problems through on site technical guidance as well as by hosting an annual conference regarding stream/watershed best management practices.

The conservation and education needs in the urban areas of Texas are varied and differ according to specific cities, but the work of Urban Biologists can be grouped into several loose and interconnected categories with each category perhaps containing several subcategories. These categories include Technical Guidance, Education/Outreach, Research and Monitoring, and Nature Tourism. The following sections outline the needs associated with each of these categories, identifies the target audiences with specific needs, and discusses strategies that Texas Parks and Wildlife Department’s Urban Wildlife Program (The Urban Program) employees to address the needs.

In the urban areas of Texas, there is a tremendous need for technical expertise regarding function and management of local ecosystems, habitats and associated wildlife species. The need for such information arises from many target audiences, but the types of technical guidance can be further divided into two subcategories: site-specific technical guidance and policy-oriented technical guidance.

This type of technical guidance is tied to a particular site that is owned by an organization seeking advice on how to manage the property for conservation. The following is a list of representative target audiences, the methods the Urban Program employs to address the needs of that audience, and priority conservation actions needed for future work.

Existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands - Many city and county parks in Texas have been developed with human recreation as the top priority, but opportunities also exist to improve habitat management and wildlife-related recreation and education on these public lands. Often, city parks and greenways are so manicured that they are devoid of the intermediate canopy layer as well as the shrub and herb layer, thereby reducing usage by wildlife species that may otherwise utilize the area. In addition, trails that are too wide create breaks in the forest cover and disrupt sensitive areas. Managers of these lands need someone to guide them toward better management of the natural resources under their care. To meet this need, the Urban Program currently conducts site visits and makes recommendations to shift the management of these parcels toward a more functional natural system. The Fort Worth Nature Center and Refuge (FWNCR) in Fort Worth and River Legacy Park in Arlington are prime examples of city parks that have made natural resource management a priority by conserving habitat integrity and educating the public by offering guided hikes and programs about the environment. These parks can serve as models for other city parks and recreation programs that wish to better integrate natural resources management into traditional programming methods.
Public lands aren’t the only parcels that need technical guidance. There are also quasi-public lands such as homeowner association open space, corporate campus open space, golf courses, etc. Managers of these lands often find themselves responsible for the management and maintenance of habitats they do not understand. These spaces may be forests, prairies or wetlands (ponds). There is a need for someone to guide them in managing these spaces to maintain their ecological health. To meet this need, the Urban Program has been conducting site visits to assess the condition of the habitats at each site. Management plans, materials, brochures and techniques are developed to address needs that are universal to property managers.

• 
  Priority conservation actions include continuing to offer site specific technical guidance to promote more ecologically sensitive management of existing public/quasi-public lands. As part of this effort, the urban program will perform ongoing assessments of the type of information land managers need, and will develop materials, techniques, etc. to meet those needs.
  

Developers do not have training in natural resource management though they make many decisions that impact the land. There is a tremendous need for an ecological insight to be factored into the development planning process. The Urban Program is currently working with cooperative developers by providing site-specific technical guidance so that development is directed into the most suitable locations while conserving the best habitats (conservation subdivision design). The undeveloped acres are then placed under conservation easement and permanently maintained as open space (for more discussion, see Land Acquisition section).

• 
  Priority conservation actions include expanding efforts to provide site-specific technical guidance to developers to ensure that habitats are considered during the project planning process. Additionally, the Urban Program plans to continue conducting workshops and conferences to promote more conservation development (for more discussion, see the Education/Outreach section).
  

Wildlife conservation in urban areas necessarily relates to managing human/wildlife interactions. Though most nuisance wildlife issues may not relate directly to a conservation concern (e.g., a listed species or an endangered habitat), our efforts to solve nuisance wildlife problems are critical to improving the perception of urban wildlife issues in general. Nuisance wildlife problems usually occur when wildlife are attracted to human dwellings for food or shelter, when some wildlife populations are enhanced by the presence of humans, and when wildlife is displaced by human development. Wildlife species that can be compatible with human development include bats, foxes, raccoons, opossums, squirrels, deer, pigeons, starlings, house sparrows, Canada geese and chimney swifts, among others. Many wildlife damage problems can be addressed by changing the perceptions and expectations of homeowners with regards to living with wildlife. Although nuisance wildlife issues are primarily handled by another agency (Texas Wildlife Services) as well as private business, the Urban Program is coordinating with these players to ensure that the methods and educational messages are acceptable and consistent.

In Texas, there are several factors working against practical, statewide coordination of land use planning. The geographical size of the state, counties with no planning authority and the proliferation of municipalities all combine to make statewide land use planning extremely difficult. Accomplishing practical planning at the regional level is also filled with difficulties. The Dallas/Ft. Worth area is a good example. The metropolitan planning organization for the DFW area is the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). The NCTCOG’s region covers 16 counties. The population of the region alone at (5.8 million) is larger than 30 states. The land area (12,800 square miles) is larger than 9 states. There are over 150 municipalities in the region. In Texas, only cities have planning authority. This makes regional planning coordination difficult and statewide planning next to impossible. There is therefore a tremendous need for coordination of regional policy to ensure proper management of natural resources on a practical, local level. To address this need, the Urban Program currently works with local planning organizations to impact regional policies. For example, the NCTCOG has recently developed a policy for integrated stormwater management (iSWM). This document seeks to unite the stormwater policies for all municipalities in the region. By being involved in crafting this regional policy, the Urban Program has directed the way the region will design and maintain stormwater wetlands, repair degraded streams, eliminate non-point source pollutants, reduce stormwater generation, etc.

• 
  Priority conservation actions include expanding the influence the Urban Program has on regional policy. This will likely necessitate training for Urban Biologists to better understand the disciplines of engineering, landscape architecture, regional planning, etc. and to become more accustomed to presenting ecological concepts in terms those professionals can relate to.
  

• 
  Municipalities have the authority given to them by the state to enact ordinances/policies governing various behaviors of citizens and businesses within the city limits. Ordinances which impact natural resources include landscape ordinances, tree preservation ordinances, subdivision regulations, etc. Often, these ordinances are written by individuals with limited training in natural resource management. As a result, the policies often promote the use of exotic plant species while mandating the elimination of native species and habitats. There is a need to make these policies more ecologically sensitive. To address this need, the Urban Program is working with local municipalities to craft new, more ecologically minded ordinances. The Urban Program is promoting the use of native plants as well as the concept of designing urban spaces around natural habitats.
  
• 
  Priority conservation actions include expanding influence on local ordinances and policies and continuing to promote regionally appropriate native landscaping. Additionally, cities would benefit from standardized template ordinances that have been written for them. This would reduce the resistance to crafting new ordinances by providing cities with “turn key” templates they can use.
  

Nuisance wildlife issues will inevitable arise within any city. Most cities wait until a nuisance problem reaches a critical mass before acting. There is a need for Texas cities to develop a proactive strategy to avert nuisance problems. To address this need, the Urban Program is working with cities to develop urban wildlife management policies. Urban Biologists are working with the city of Lewisville to develop an educational program to encourage beneficial wildlife while also creating a system of municipal responses to observed nuisance behaviors of targeted species of wildlife (for more information, see the education/outreach section). City staff will work with citizens to monitor and report human/wildlife encounters. Encounters will be categorized and ranked according to the relative acceptability of the behavior. A series of “trigger” behaviors (an unacceptable behavior such as coyotes taking pets) will be outlined and corresponding municipal action will be identified in the plan. Should a particular population begin to exhibit trigger behaviors, then the management plan will dictate the municipal response. The municipal response at the different levels of trigger behaviors will be proactive in nature and designed to stop current behaviors as well as prevent the appearance of more aggressive trigger behaviors in the wildlife population.

• 
  Priority conservation actions include conducting research to determine the most effective behavioral modification methods to employ for each species of concern. Additionally, standard recommendations need to be developed based on research as it becomes available.
  

As mentioned in the technical guidance section, the Urban Program is working with individual development projects. However, there is a need to educate developers and government officials on a larger scale. The Urban Program is currently working with local and statewide partners to conduct conferences on conservation development. Several examples exist. In the Austin area, the Ladybird Johnson Wildflower Research Center has partnered with various agencies to present a conservation development conference for the last several years. The town of Flower Mound has done the same. There is a momentum building in support of conservation development. Priority conservation actions include continuing to conduct conferences to promote conservation development. However, there is a statewide need to define exactly what conservation development entails.

• 
  Priority conservation actions include The Urban Program facilitating and promoting the push to create guidelines for conservation development in Texas. Additionally, the concept of conservation development has heretofore been limited to upper income developments. The Urban Program will seek ways to apply conservation development concepts to more affordably priced projects.
  

Schools in Texas urban areas are hesitant to bus kids off-site for environmental studies. Therefore there’s a need for schools to have outdoor classrooms on site for the students to study local habitats, wildlife, etc. To meet this need, the Urban Program works with local schools to create schoolyard habitats. The assistance offered ranges from personal one-on-one guidance between an Urban Biologist and school officials to several schools attending a schoolyard habitat workshop. Urban Biologists teach workshops on creating schoolyard habitats as well as workshops to teach teachers how to present ecological concepts in the classroom. As part of this effort, the Houston urban office has written a manual entitled “Creating a School Habitat”. Following the Houston urban office’s lead, many school habitats have been created across the state.

• 
  Priority conservation actions include updating and reprinting the “Creating a School Habitat” manual as well as expanding the number of workshops offered.
  

The landscape/nursery industry as well as the average homeowner has a tremendous impact on the vegetation that gets planted in local landscapes. The historical trend in the landscape industry has been to promote exotic plants. Therefore, in urbanizing areas native plant communities are systematically replaced by predominantly exotic species. Habitat is lost along the way. To address this problem, the Urban Program developed the Texas Wildscapes Backyard Wildlife Habitat Program. This program encourages homeowners to provide food, water, and shelter in their yard and certifies those who do so. The program promotes the use of native plants to not only provide food for wildlife, but to also provide native structure for nesting and cover. As part of this effort, the Urban Program produced a book entitled Texas Wildscapes: Gardening for Wildlife. To support Texas Wildscapes, the Urban Program conducts Wildscapes workshops across the state. These workshops teach homeowners various aspects and details of Wildscaping in their area. Using concepts from the Texas Wildscapes program, demonstration gardens have been created across the state.

• 
  Priority conservation actions include converting the information in the Texas Wildscapes book into a web-based application.
  

Texas is 97% privately owned. The profile of the typical landowner in Texas has been changing for some time now. Historically, land ownership in Texas was dominated by large ranches with the owner living in close contact with the property. Today, that picture has begun to change. There is now a proliferation of absentee landowners. The current trend is for urbanites living in Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, etc. to own property elsewhere in the state. The large ranch tradition is giving way to more landowners owning smaller parcels. This shift has generated associated problems. The absentee landowner no longer has the close connection with the property and is therefore less experienced with land management. To address the needs of these landowners, the Urban Program conducts landowner workshops in the major urban areas. In Houston as well as San Antonio, these workshops have met with great success and have been well attended.

• 
  Priority conservation actions include expanding the workshop effort as well as developing materials specifically tailored to these new landowners. These new landowners are generally technologically adept and would therefore benefit from multimedia tools (videos, CDROM’s, etc.) to help educate them.
  

The Urban Program is involved in educating current professionals, but recognizes the value in training the next generation professional as well. Currently, Urban Biologists are partnering with local universities to lecture in landscape architecture as well as city and regional planning. The Urban Program has also helped to develop and teach Urban Wildlife Management courses at Tarleton State University and Texas A&M University. As part of the Texas A&M course, Urban Biologists assisted in the development of an urban wildlife management textbook that is currently in press.

• 
  Priority conservation actions include expanding the number of universities teaching urban wildlife management courses as well as creating courses of study in landscape architecture that train students to design landscapes to mimic natural ecosystems.
  

There is a growing trend of urbanites becoming more and more disconnected from the natural environment. The amount to which people are aware of environmental issues varies greatly within the general public. As a result, the Urban Program has developed varying strategies to meet the differing outreach needs. For the general, disinterested urban audience, Urban Biologists rely heavily on the media. Television, newspaper, radio, etc. all serve to engage the masses with a general message. For audiences with some interest in natural resource issues (garden clubs, scout groups, civic organizations, etc.), Urban Biologists deliver presentations along general wildlife themes (Bats are Beneficial, Landscaping for Wildlife, etc.). These presentations are designed to casually educate the audience and create a desire to learn more. As an individual’s awareness increases and the desire for more in-depth material increases, he/she finds other outreach opportunities more suitable. For these individuals, Urban Biologists offer volunteer training programs such as the Texas Master Naturalist Program and the Texas Nature Trackers Program. These programs offer more detailed instruction, but also require more action in return from the individual. Once a person has gone through these programs, he/she becomes a partner with the Urban Program in a sense and begins to help the program accomplish its goals by speaking to groups, manning educational booths, etc.

Consultants and professionals are often somewhat educated in natural resource management, but may lack background in particular areas (bioengineering, use of native plants in the landscape, etc.). To address specific needs of these individuals, the Urban Program conducts specialized workshops. As a member of the “Stream Team”, the Dallas office helps present a workshop in Stream Dynamics/Bioengineering each year. This workshop is used as a forum to address problems specifically faced by professionals in the field and to educate them about techniques and methods uncommon to our area.

• 
  Priority conservation actions include conducting research to determine how locally native plant materials perform in bioengineering techniques commonly used in other parts of the country. Additionally, regional curves for local streams need to be researched and generated. Lastly, pristine reaches of each stream type in our urban areas need to be located and measurements recorded to serve as templates for restoration projects.
  

There is a great need for urban wildlife research. Urban wildlife management is a relatively new discipline so there is much that is unknown. To address this need, the Urban Program has been partnering with local universities to conduct urban wildlife research. The Austin office partnered with a local university to examine the impact of Wildscaping on native bird diversity. The Dallas office partnered with a local university to examine the ecology of urban white winged doves.

• 
  Priority conservation actions include research to address various nuisance wildlife issues (grackle overpopulation, coyote behavior modification, etc.) as well as the impacts of various urban practices (mowing, trail building, etc.) on urban-sensitive species (Texas horned lizard, painted bunting, etc.).
  

• 
  In addition to research gained in partnership with universities, the Urban Program can also benefit from trained citizen volunteers. There is value in data collected by citizens who’ve been trained to gather such information. Urban Biologists are limited in the amount of time they can dedicate to research. An army of trained citizens can capture data in locations and at times unavailable to state agents. To capitalize on this, the Urban Program works with several volunteer programs including the Texas Master Naturalists and the Texas Nature Trackers. These programs train volunteers to monitor or “watch” species of concern or interest. Currently the most popular programs are the Hummingbird Watch and the Texas Horned Lizard Watch.
  
• 
  Priority conservation actions include expanding the number and competency levels of citizen volunteers through additional training sessions as well as broadening the list of species that these volunteers are capable of monitoring.
  

• 
  Natural open space in urban is valuable psychologically, environmentally and ecologically, yet it is not as plentiful as many Texans would like it to be. There is a need for strategic regional open space acquisition. To assist planners and other officials, the Urban Program has become involved in land acquisition efforts. The San Antonio urban office helped assess lands to be purchased with the funding generated by a local bond election. The habitat values of the proposed lands, as well as aquifer recharge areas were given high priority.
  
• 
  Priority conservation actions include expanding the Urban Program’s influence in regional planning organizations as well as better coordinating the open space systems of local governments within a region.
  

Local municipalities often employ planners in the parks departments who understand the need to purchase parcels to preserve them as open space. The Urban Program currently assists such planners in determine the best parcels for purchase. However, many cities do not have the funding to purchase sufficient amounts of natural open space. These cities rely on the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department to provide funding for land acquisition through grants. Additionally, there is a need to ensure that those lands that are purchased are managed as natural areas.

• 
  Priority conservation actions include increasing the funding and personnel available for administering grants to assist in purchasing open spaces.
  

Land values of open space in urban areas often make outright purchase cost prohibitive. There is a need to use the private sector to broaden the open space network without draining the budget of the local municipality. The Urban Program is currently working with the private sector to ensure open space networks are considered during development. Using conservation subdivision design concepts and conservation easements, land is being set aside as open space without the need for public purchase.

• 
  Priority conservation actions include expanding the public’s awareness of available options for creating open space networks by conducting additional workshops and conferences on this subject.
  

Many national surveys have indicated an increasing interest in wildlife viewing. Local municipalities often have several potential park sites that can be greatly enhanced to improve the wildlife viewing opportunities. Combine this with the general need to maintain wildlife habitats in the city, and a great partnership emerges to create locations within our urban areas for meaningful wildlife viewing experiences. The Dallas and Houston areas have large international airports resulting in a high level of travelers passing through the area. It’s not uncommon for these travelers to find themselves with layovers at these airports. Birdwatching enthusiasts may often look for a local, easily accessible location to spot native avifauna. The Urban Program currently works with municipalities to create urban habitats in local parks as well as provide viewing opportunities (blinds, etc.).

• 
  Priority conservation actions include expanding this effort to get additional sites in place as well as creating a wildlife viewing guide locating sites within easy travel distance from the airports.
  

Ecoregions of Texas………………………...1

Texas Rivers and River Basins…………….. 12

Bays and Estuaries…………………………. 29

Monitoring is an important part of the management of habitat, flora, and fauna. Without a monitoring component to each management plan or strategic planning effort, the goals of that document can not be met. Monitoring allows for adaptive management, a principle in which management objectives and goals are maintained or amended based on information delivered through monitoring efforts. Monitoring allows managers to know whether changes are occurring on the landscape or within a population.

• 
  Targeted Monitoring: “Monitoring the condition and response to management of species and habitats that are identified as being of concern or interest.”
  

• 
  Context Monitoring: “Monitoring a broad array of ecosystem components at multiple scales without specific reference to influences of ongoing management.”
  

• 
  Cause and Effect Monitoring: “Investigates the mechanisms that underlie habitat and species response to management and other forms of disturbance.”
  

It is both strategically and operationally difficult to maintain a monitoring effort that meets the needs of all species and habitats. It must be noted that a strong program would include the use and interaction of all three of these methods, within the financial and personnel limitations existing in each wildlife agency. It is impossible to monitor every Species of Concern in the state of Texas based on financial constraints and personnel limitation, therefore the species list and hierarchy established in this strategy must be followed barring changes in priority based on imminent threat.

• 
  Make a commitment to improve monitoring of terrestrial animals and their habitats.
  

• 
  Ensure that all monitoring contributes to adaptive management by exploring the causes for trends and alternative scenarios that could reverse unfavorable trends.
  

• 
  Ensure that all monitoring protocols are sound and data collected are statistically useful in order to guarantee their appropriateness to be included in the Natural Diversity Database.
  

• 
  Implement monitoring strategies that integrate habitat and population monitoring. Monitoring habitat alone will rarely be sufficient for adaptive management because habitat relationships are not well understood and may not be predictable.
  

• 
  Recognize that monitoring will exist at different scales. Coordinate across ecological and administrative scales, with emphasis on the role of the Regions. Because TPWD would be working with partners, it would be beneficial to all groups if ecological regions were used for both communications and coordination.
  

• 
  Establish appropriate roles and coordination for other agencies, organizations and private landowners.
  

• 
  Provide adequate staffing, skills and funding structures to accomplish monitoring objectives.
  

• 
  Adopt and integrate three types of monitoring (context, targeted, and cause-and-effect).
  

• 
  Use sound ecological principles and risk assessment to prioritize and design monitoring activities.
  

• 
  Use partnerships and interagency coordination to accomplish monitoring objectives.
  

• 
  Ensure that individuals and teams responsible for monitoring development and oversight have appropriate skills.
  

TPWD should work with partners to implement monitoring strategies based on the above components. While TPWD already has monitoring efforts underway, those efforts should be evaluated to determine whether they meet the above elements. They should also be evaluated to determine whether data collected from these monitoring efforts can be incorporated into the NDD.

Texas is a large state with many species and habitats in need of monitoring; however, several issues need to be taken into account prior to continuing this process. TPWD has historically monitored several species using several different techniques that have been outlined by biologists working for the Department. In addition to terrestrial species and habitat, Texas is tasked with monitoring bays, estuaries and all of the inland reservoirs, rivers and many spring-fed catchments. The sheer size and need is difficult to measure, but a significant portion of the TPWD budget is dedicated to monitoring species and habitats.

The main monitoring document used by TPWD was developed to coordinate efforts on TPWD lands in 1996. The Baseline Inventory and Monitoring Procedures on Texas Parks and Wildlife Lands outlines the methods TPWD employees use to monitor or evaluate vegetation, herptiles, birds, and mammals. At the time of its development, this document met several of the needs of TPWD and its land managers. Procedures should now be updated based on new technology as well as refined field techniques and data collection forms. An effort should be made to review this document and update it as needed to best accomplish the goals of this dynamic strategy. A special emphasis should be put on new technology such as GPS units and GIS software. These items were not widely used by TPWD in 1996 but are in frequent use by all field staff today. Information and education on the use of this newer technology should also be outlined in an updated version of this document.

Coastal bays and estuaries are monitored monthly (depending on need) and trend data is used to determine whether there are any critical needs within these areas. The methods that are currently employed have been successful and do not need to be amended at this time.

Texas has not had a complete biological inventory since 1905, when Vernon Bailey and his fellow surveyors scoured the state collecting data on animals and plants for the United State Bureau of Biological Survey. The resulting publication is the Biological Survey of Texas and was published 100 years ago this year. It is important to establish this document as the precursor to an updated monitoring program. Without a continuation of the inventory it will be impossible to monitor temporal fluctuations of populations and attempt to correlate those fluctuations with variables. Continuation of a Texas biological survey will allow for better adaptive management efforts of Texas’ wildlife and habitats.

Prior to conducting survey efforts, it is important that available technology, in the form of database and spatial analyses and mapping software, are used to generate vegetative cover maps of the state. This priority was also analyzed in the priority conservation actions with a high priority being put on the ground truthing of those data and maps that are developed.

The 2005 Land and Water Resources Conservation and Recreation Plan (Land and Water Conservation Plan) established priority ecoregions within Texas as the scale at which would be most appropriate for the making future decisions. In order to begin looking at a finer scale for on-the-ground management it is imperative that TPWD create priorities within these Tiered ecoregions. High priority ecoregions or Tier 1 ecoregions consist of the Blackland Prairies, Gulf Coast Prairies and Marshes, and South Texas Plains. Within the Blackland Prairies the most important issue is the rate of conversion of native grasslands into crops or urban development. There are approximately 5,000 acres of remnant prairies left in this ecoregion. All other habitats in this region are also in decline, making the entire ecoregion a high priority for management and monitoring. Restoration is critical for the survival of this ecoregion.

The role of citizen science in habitat monitoring is evolving. Properly trained citizens not only reduce the cost of data collection and ground-truthing, but they can also become engaged supporters of fish and wildlife conservation. As the eminent ecologist Gordon Orians has observed, many citizen scientists may have more detailed and intimate knowledge of a particular landscape than professional biologists who may not spend as much time in the field. On the other hand, citizen scientists can present a challenging variable for the resource manager because they fall outside of the usual within-organization structure, may not be well-versed in established survey techniques, and must be trained and potentially tested to ensure that they provide reliable information (http://www.birds.cornell.edu/LabPrograms/CitSci/). Despite these challenges, some of the most successful monitoring programs, such as the Christmas Bird Counts, are carried out by citizen scientists.